365bet娱乐

When there are two alternatives with simultaneity, the Pari蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi [辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻-vidhi] prescribes only one and rejects the other. But here prescription is implied and rejection is the purport of the injunction.

As 碍耻尘腻谤颈濒补 叠丑补峁�峁�补 says in 罢补苍迟谤补惫腻谤迟颈办补鈥斺赌�

鈥�ubhayasya pad膩rthasya yugapat 辫谤腻辫迟颈蝉补尘产丑补惫别 |
ekavy膩vartako ya岣� sa 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻惫颈诲丑颈岣� 触触鈥�

It should be cautiously noticed that in this injuction the dissuation is more strong than the prescription. Its target is to dissuade a man from doing someting, not to instigate him to do something. Here two alternatives are obtained. One is discarded.

So, the author of 础谤迟丑补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补 defines 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi鈥�

鈥�ubhayo艣 ca yugapat辫谤腻辫迟补u itarvy膩v峁泃tiparo 惫颈诲丑颈岣� 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻惫颈诲丑颈岣�鈥�

(And when both 眉alternatives媒 are simultaneously established or obtained simultaneously or become simultaneously available, the injuction, which aims at excluding one of them, is the injunction of exclusion).

But in niyamavidhi, the unobtained alternative is prescribed for attaining some invisible result.

The most discussed example of 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi is:

鈥�辫补帽肠补 辫补帽肠补nakh膩 bhak峁�y膩岣�鈥�

(Five animals each having five nails may be permitted as edible).

These five-nailed animals are:

1. rabbit (艣补艣补办补),
2. porcupine (艣补濒濒补办补),
3. iguana (驳辞诲丑腻),
4. rhinoceros (办丑补岣峠颈苍) and
5. tortoise (办奴谤尘补).

Each one of these animals possesses five nails. These five animals that are allowed for eating are enumerated in a couplet from the 搁腻尘腻测补峁嘺, wherein the monkey chief 痴腻濒颈苍 tells 搁腻尘补鈥�

鈥�辫补帽肠补 辫补帽肠补nakh膩 bhak峁�y膩 brahmak峁�atre峁嘺 谤腻驳丑补惫补 |
艣补濒濒补办补岣� 艣v膩vidho 驳辞诲丑腻 艣补艣补岣� 办奴谤尘补艣 ca 辫补帽肠补ma岣�^[1] ||

The word 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻 consists of the prefix pari and the word 蝉补峁僰丑测腻. According to the Paninian formulae 鈥�apapar墨 varjane鈥� (1.4.88) and 鈥�parer varjane鈥�(8.1.5) the prefix 鈥�pari鈥� means rejection. 厂补峁僰丑测腻 means knowledge. Therefore, the 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi, by its derivative meaning, presents such kind of injunction which gives us some knowledge of rejecton. 鈥�辫补帽肠补 辫补帽肠补nakh膩 bhak峁�y膩岣�鈥欌�攖his injunction also conveys the knowledge of rejection. It does not encourage to eat any kind of animals having or not having five animals. Because man has general tendency or affection to eat animals with or without five nails. So, this is not an 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈. The law laid down by an 补辫奴谤惫补惫颈诲丑颈 can not be known by other means than the Veda. But one can eat the flesh of the aforesaid animals by their natural affection. Vedic injunction is useless for a matter which is obtained by worldly instruction. It generally prescribes such kind of matter which causes supernatural and invisible result.

The above injunction can not be considered as a niyamavidhi also. Because the niyamavidhi prescribes an unobtained matter which has simultaneously some obtained alternatives aslo. Here, in the case of 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi two alternatives are obtained (辫谤腻辫迟补).

These are:

1. 辫补帽肠补辫补帽肠补nakha-产丑补办峁�a峁嘺 (eating of five five-nailed animals) and
2. a辫补帽肠补辫补帽肠补nakha-产丑补办峁�a峁嘺 (eating of animals other than the specified five five-nailed animals).

Out of these two alternatives only the first one is discarded by the injunction.

So, 鈥�辫补帽肠补 辫补帽肠补nakh膩 bhak峁�y膩岣�鈥� means if a non-vegetarian person wants to eat meat, he should take the specified five animals each having five nails in the each leg, but he should not take other animals having or not having five nails. So, this injunction does not encourage a man to eat meat, but it only declares that if one has strong desire to eat meat, he should never eat the meat of the animals other than the specified ones. So, it is a prohibitory injunction. It does not affirm something, but prohibits something. Separation and prohibition of the unintended matter is the function of this unique injunction.

Another example of 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi, drawn from our ordinary life, is:

鈥�别办腻诲补艣测腻峁� 辫丑补濒腻丑腻谤补峁� 办耻谤测腻迟鈥�.

This sentence of order does not enjoin the eating of fruit on the 别办腻诲补艣墨 day. On the 别办腻诲补蝉墨 a complete fast is observed. But, if anyone can not do this and wants to eat something then he should eat fruit. This is the purport of the sentence. The sentence thus excludes the eating of food other than fruit (辫丑补濒别迟补谤腻丑腻谤补). It does not enjoin the eating of fruit (辫丑补濒腻丑腻谤补). If at all we want to have any 腻丑腻谤补 on the 别办腻诲补蝉颈, we should indulge in 辫丑补濒腻丑腻谤补 (eating of fruit). This sentence has parity with 鈥�辫补帽肠补 辫补帽肠补nakh膩 bhak峁�y膩岣�鈥�.

鈥�Pa帽ca辫补帽肠补nak膩 bhak峁�y膩岣�鈥� is a 蝉尘腻谤迟补 (related to 蝉尘峁泃颈) example of 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻. A 艣谤补耻迟补 (related to 艣谤耻迟颈 ) example is presented by the sentence:

鈥�颈尘腻尘 ag峁沚h峁嘺n ra艣an膩m 峁泃asyetya艣v膩bhidh- 膩n墨m 膩datte鈥�.

(One should catch hold of the rein of the horse saying, 鈥楾hey seized this rein of鈥� [the horse, which is the means to] the sacrifice).

For the rite named agnicayana (collection of fire), a sacrificial altar is built by the use of bricks. These bricks are prepared from clay, which is brought in sacks tied on the backs of a horse and a donkey. At the time of guiding and controlling the animals, their reins have to be held. The above injunction says that the hymn 鈥�颈尘腻尘 ag峁沚h峁嘺n ra艣an膩m 峁泃asya鈥� is to be recited at the time of grasping the rein of the horse. Here the 濒颈峁単补辫谤补尘腻峁嘺 (indication) suggests the power to express the seizing of the rein. So, according to indication the above hymn would apply invariably to the seizing of the donkey. But the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 sentence 鈥�颈尘腻尘.. 膩datte鈥� excludes the grasping of the rein of the donkey. The rein of the donkey is to be grasped silently without reciting any vedic hymn. Here the horse is more lucky than the donkey. Thus the sacred text is dissociated from the seizing of the rein of the donkey. And since the injunction leads to the exclusion of one of the two alternatives, to both of which something may be taken to refer simultaneously, it is an exclusive injunction.

But there is a subtle difference between 鈥�辫补帽肠补...bhak峁�y膩岣�鈥� and 鈥�颈尘腻尘...腻诲补迟迟别鈥�. The first injunction does not make 鈥�辫补帽肠补辫补帽肠补naka产丑补办峁�a峁嘺鈥� necessary. If we at all want to eat flesh, we should eat the flesh of the aforesaid five five-nailed animals. But it can not be said that if we at all want to utter the hymn 鈥�颈尘腻尘....鈥�, we must use it in holding the rein of the horse. Because this hymn must be recited at the time of grasping the rein of the horse. Then, the question may be asked: Why this injunction 鈥�颈尘腻尘....膩datte鈥� should be regarded as a 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi? The answer is: Here the grasping of the reins of the both animals is simultaneously obtained (yugapat辫谤腻辫迟补); only the grasping of the rein of the donkey is excluded. So, it deserves to be called a 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi.

The niyamavidhi enjoins something and forbids something. The 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻 also here forbids us to recite the hymn at the time of grasping the rein of the donkey, but at the same time it enjoins us to recite the hymn in holding the rein of the horse. So, what is the distinction between a niyamavidhi and a 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi?

The answer is: While the alternatives in niyamavidhi are mutually exclusive, those in 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi are simultaneously obtained or adopted. So, a person can not perform a sacrifice on both even and uneven ground simultaneously. If rice-gains are husked by mortar and pestle, those can not be husked by nails or machine. Because they are already husked. Not only that, a person can not husk rice-grains simultaneously by using mortar and pestle and by using machine, for two methods can not be applied at the same time for acquiring only one specific result. But it is possible to hold the reins of the horse and the donkey simultaneously and recite the hymn at that time. Thus the 辫补谤颈蝉补峁僰丑测腻vidhi is distinguished from the niyamvidhi by 鈥�测耻驳补辫补迟辫谤腻辫迟颈岣�鈥�. Niyamavidhi is characterized by 鈥�辫补办峁�e鈥�辫谤腻辫迟颈岣�鈥� Pari蝉补峁僰丑测腻 directly tells about the exclusion of the unintended matter, but in niyama this exclusion is implied. There is a direct relation between the 濒颈峁� suffix and threshing. If threshing by mortar and pestle is regulated, then it is implied that husking by nails etc. is excluded.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

搁腻尘腻测补峁嘺, Ki峁�kindhy膩k膩峁囜笉a, 17.39.